Flat Earth

:) you,re welcome

Apr 23, 2018 -- 7:17AM, lfc1971 wrote:

detraveller like studyform is a other one who couldn't conceive of the possibility that the universe could be flat, too abstract a concept for their brains to understandAnd then when it is pointed out to them that the universe is flat, or at least might be, they become angryThat's the typical response of a stupid person. The same thing will happen next time they are wrong on whatever subject it doesn't matter,,( it wont be long) they will become angry againThat's why they remain stupid

I have neither become angry nor denied the possibility of of a flat universe(please don't make things up). My question was, why does everything become flat over time. And, if its because of erosion, why does erosion make things flag and not turn them into other shapes? or make them disappear or fly off?

Let's see if you can answer it this time.

PS: I am not looking for the correct answer. If you don't know, I'm fine with that. But at least try answering the question asked instead of deflecting it.

For the record, this is my fourth attempt at asking for the answer.

detraveller I will try again, time makes everything flat, given enough time
you, mentioned mountains on earth, why do they not become flat

They are, and they will, given enough time, its inevitable
you say some mountains on earth are rising, not becoming flat
So what, mountains are formed by the movement of the earths plates rubbing against each other
these plates, and the mountains will crumble into dust and become flat

Given enough time, the universe has had more than enough time

Now I don't want to have to explain that again
have to go out

Thanks lfc. You're repeating the exact thing I am asking the explanation for. Time makes everything flat, given enough time, everything will become flat, mountains will be flat, universe has had more than enough time etc etc.

I just asked why time makes things flat, and not some other shape. Or why erosion makes things flat.

Also I never said anything about the mountains rising or becoming flat, don't associate things with me that I don't say.

When the earth gets destroyed , most likely by the sun exploding in however million years- it will not be flat but its a hopeless case to convince those that wont accept it.

detraveller look at it this way

lets say after the big bang, whatever , the universe was the shape of a mountain
now within that mountain there were caves and potholes and rivers and little creatures etc

now given enough time everything decays and erodes , it may take a very long time but that is inevitable, that's life

and gradually the mountain changes shape , over time , it breaks becomes smaller until it is no longer a mountain , and disappears into the valleys and the sea
until eventually it is only dust and particles
that's time that's what time does

and then you see the universe is no longer the shape of a mouintain,

it is flat, as flat as a piece of paper

will look in later, have to go out

Of course I should say that the little creatures within the mountain were not alive when all these changes were taking place in the vast reaches of past time

And now they are but a microscopic dot in the vast expance of space and unable to see very far from within their own little world

But there are signs and evidence and hints of what took pace, and indeed is ongoing, for those who can think in a clever and logical and creative and original way

I think that might be where you and studyform are going wrong,
well study might be the worst but you,re not much better detraveller

It was better for you before the explanation lfc.

Apr 23, 2018 -- 12:01PM, lfc1971 wrote:

detraveller look at it this waylets say after the big bang, whatever , the universe was the shape of a mountainnow within that mountain there were caves and potholes and rivers and little creatures etcnow given enough time everything decays and erodes , it may take a very long time but that is inevitable, that's lifeand gradually the mountain changes shape , over time , it breaks becomes smaller until it is no longer a mountain , and disappears into the valleys and the seauntil eventually it is only dust and particles that's time that's what time doesand then you see the universe is no longer the shape of a mouintain,it is flat, as flat as a piece of paper

My question was simple. Why do things end up being flat with time? You are not answering that and keep repeating that with time everything becomes flat. I don't see how I can be going wrong when I haven't even said anything. I just asked why things, given enough time, end up being flat?

For the record, this is the fifth time I have asked this question.

oh dear detraveller I will have to explain to you again, for more than the 5th time

lets take a mountain, as I have just done to represent the universe
now over time the mountain will erode and decay and wear away until it becomes dust
merely particles that will be swept away into the sea and valleys
that means the mountain has become flat over time

it is not possible for it to do anything else

indeed it is inevitable, given enough time

now I will have to look in later
I don't want to come back and see any more silly comments detraveller
try and get a little idea of the vastness of time and what that means
what it must mean

The reason why everything in time becomes flat is because we're living in a Multiverse, and at the top of the multiverses is an even more impressive version of Dianne Abbot.

Alright the mountain erodes and the particles are swept away by wind, water etc. Let's say after x years, y amount of particles have eroded. What I don't understand is why do they become flat? What if they all went to another place and formed another mountain? This is the think I don't understand, that why it becomes flat instead of taking some other shape?

Also its wrong to take a mountain to represent the universe. The mountain in your example is eroded by external elements. A universe is all the existing matter as a whole. It cannot be 'swept away' into seas and valleys because those seas and valleys are a part of the universe. If they weren't it wouldn't be called universe because then its not 'all existing matter'. But leave this for another time. For now I'd love to know why things go flat after time. It's a very simple question.

Apr 22, 2018 -- 9:11PM, wolf3011 wrote:

The second question would be to the flat earth mob, what possible benefit or motivation would there be in some kind of huge conspiracy to mislead people about the shape of the planet?

I'm still reading through this but I've been asking this all along. Perhaps the answer is yet to unfold {{{drumroll}}} as I continue

haven't time to answer properly, but the mountain in my example is not eroded by external elements
it is eroded by elements from within the universe, that's the point
different mountains can form , but not from sand and dust, that's impossible
sand and dust will scatter and into the sea and valleys etc
yes new mouintains will arise when tectonic plates collide, but then again they will erode until eventually there are no plates left to form any new mountains, only dust and particles
and then eventually nothing

everything is cooling down, decaying becoming ash and dust
that means that the universe, which has had more than enough time has been through this process
of course, as within a flat piece of paper there are mountains and valleys and riverbeds
that doesn't matter, they only look like mountains because we are a microscopic dot within the vast piece of paper
but the paper is flat nevertheless, because everything as old as the universe must be because of erosion and time, the same as the mountain
the elements are the same throughout

Nope no answers (nothing to do with your debate lfc)

I must be stupid to not be able to read the answer in all those lines.

Lfc 1- 0 Detraveller

The second question would be to the flat earth mob, what possible benefit or motivation would there be in some kind of huge conspiracy to mislead people about the shape of the planet?

I'm still reading through this but I've been asking this all along. Perhaps the answer is yet to unfold {{{drumroll}}} as I continue

And on a very practical note: if you Google the flat earth, South America and Australia/NZ are at opposite edges of the "disc". What is then this Qantas witchcraft offering to do a flight from Santiago to Auckland in 13hrs?

detaveller
you have a universe the shape of a mountain made of marble
the same marble that you find in headstones in cemeteries
in this universe you also have water and rain
rain as we know is a very weak form of acid
the rainfall in the universe, just like the rainfall on the dissolves the marble headstone, over time
dissolves the mountain

How does the mountain reform to maintain the universe in the shape of a mountain?

does the centre of the universe become flat first?

So the planet will turn to dust because of natural decay over time, by which time everything will be flat?
You don't half come up with some crap.

SO:
No Volcanic activity from within the Earth will create new islands or mountains, the ever moving plates will dissolve, no asteroids etc will hit the planet? The Sun won't expand to about the orbit of Jupiter and start the whole thing off again via a supernova which will affect everything within about 1000 light years, creating a nebula and coalescing into a new star group?

Just about the only time atoms are smashed to no distance between nucleus and things whizzing round the nucleus is when stuff crashes into a pulsar. Otherwise they may fuse, or split but they don't disappear. Or wear away.

The galaxies are nearly all moving away from each other at the rate of about 70Km a second, but those furthest away appear to be moving apart at faster than the speed of light.
Which according to all we understand is impossible....

Just like the disintegration of everything in an ever flattening universe, under the theory of lfc.

Apr 23, 2018 -- 8:19PM, lfc1971 wrote:

detaveller you have a universe the shape of a mountain made of marblethe same marble that you find in headstones in cemeteries in this universe you also have water and rainrain as we know is a very weak form of acidthe rainfall in the universe, just like the rainfall on the dissolves the marble headstone, over timedissolves the mountainHow does the mountain reform to maintain the universe in the shape of a mountain?

I have already given up and awarded you the point lfc. But I have to say, you are still not answering a very simple question, instead adamant on writing more and more crap that I haven't really asked.

can you not answer he question detraveller?

because imo the universe cannot maintain its shape in the form of a mountain
as I keep saying it becomes flat

now explain how it can if that's what you believe

studyform volcanic activity doesn't last forever

Aspro, to answer your question:
I'd suggest typing: "what makes people believe conspiracy theories" into Google and reading some of the many quite interesting links that appear.

I thought this one was quite good.
http://theconversation.com/why-people-believe-in-conspiracy-theories-and-how-to-change-their-minds-82514

Lfc, there is a difference between saying the universe cannot maintain its shape AND it becomes flat. If you say everything disintegrates or erodes with time, I can understand that. I see it with my own eyes. Enough examples. What you are running away from is explaining 'why it then becomes flat?'. Where does it say that something that erodes with time will become flat?

The spinning molten core of the Earth, creating a magnetic field and holding the atmosphere in place and the fact that the planets, solar system and galaxy are all spinning, will most likely keep it all happening until the whole solar system goes, lfc. The amount of vastness of time required for even a fraction of what you propose would be in the trillions of light years, which is way beyond anything remotely considered (by anyone scientific) currently.

because it cannot do anything else, that is the very nature of erosion
the marble headstone erodes until it is flat
the mountain erodes until it is flat

Studyform...Google people who can't think for themselves and what makes poeople cling onto old belief systems?


In A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance (1957), Leon Festinger proposed that human beings strive for internal psychological consistency in order to mentally function in the real world.

A person who experiences internal inconsistency tends to become psychologically uncomfortable, and is motivated to reduce the cognitive dissonance.

This is done by making changes to justify their stressful behavior, either by adding new parts to the cognition causing the psychological dissonance,

or by actively avoiding social situations and/or contradictory information likely to increase the magnitude of the cognitive dissonance.

studyform there is enough matter, protons and neutrons within the universe to make it flat given the age that we know the universe to be

This is getting deep now. So deep in fact that if we carry on at this rate we'll pop out in Australia, thus proving the earth is round. Keep going lads!

I seriously think that applies MUCH more to conspiracy theory believers than me, McGinty.

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/talking-apes/201801/why-do-people-believe-in-conspiracy-theories

It's a question of what you think is accurate and what you think is a belief system.

As we both believe the opposite to be fact and the other to be a misguided belief system, I can only say,
Right back at 'cha

Lfc in your flat universe theory which part of the universe is more likely to become flat first is it  the centre?

Does it have a centre? I don't know.
I insist on not knowing.

we shall find out in a minute.

It'll be more than a minute, it'll be in the vastness of time, imo

i want ten answers like you  usually get.

As Jomo reports (having looked into it a little):


The Flat Earth Theory 

says we are ringed by a wall of ice called Antarctica.

Brrrrrrr

mmh the centre of the universe is not flat it is not flat like the centre of a piece of paper is not flat

but has it always been not flat like the centre of a piece of paper is not flat or was it once not round like the centre of an apple is not round.

Well if he's looked into it (a little), he MUST be right. 99.9% of everyone else and all the ACTUAL evidence must be wrong.
I'd like to stand corrected, McGinty.

But for now, I'll just have to be wrong.

yes that's correct it has been neither of those things and both of those things
that is it is the centre of something flat and the centre of something round
its a position and nothing to do with roundness or flatness

don't confuse one with the other

FFS!!!!

What am I doing with my life?
Arguing with people who thing the universe is like a piece of paper and the Earth is flat.

I've got a quiz to write

I'll make sure it contains facts.

Jomo is only reporting his findings

I'm quite sure he is not a flat earther.

that's the most sensible thing you have said study

goodnite

Study's first factual quiz question:

Who was the first man on the moon?

McGinty... indeed I am neither (as yet) a flat earther, or flat universe.

However, lfc has made me thinking of an awe-inspiring ending to a film (similar been done before to illustrate the size of the universe, but not quite like this) *cue dramatic music*: it's revealed that the earth is just a tiny speck of pulp making up a single piece of paper. Further more, our universe is just one of 500 pieces of paper stacked on top of each other and wrapped up in a ream of Ryman everyday printing paper. Cut to office woman who picks up one of these reams from a massive stack sitting next to the photocopier. She takes out one sheet, puts it in the photocopier and says to her colleague: "ready for copying", leaving the viewer considering whether there's an exact carbon copy of our universe sitting in someone's (God's?) in-tray.

lfc is correct. I believe he is describing the law of entropy.

Basically the universe will eventually achieve equilibrium. The complex things that we see right now, such as life, volcanos, etc are a result of the energy from the big bang. In other words, the universe is undergoing a 'settling down' process. It's a process of decay. It's been decaying since the moment of the big bang, but within that process, complex patterns can form and that is what we can see, but eventually, the complex breaks down into simpler and simpler components. It may take a very long time, but it's inevitable.

Think of it like a break shot in a game of pool or snooker. The balls bounce around everywhere and interact with each other in complex ways, but eventually they slow down and stop altogther. Thats when they reach equilibium. The universe is still young and the balls are bouncing around all over the place. Eventually they will stop.

thanks for that gmad, I think I mentioned atrophy earlier, entropy might be the right word

yes entropy better: gradual breakdown of matter and energy in the universe
atrophy: refers to physical decline

I think my balls have reached equilibrium.

Too much info

Try different underpants make my hay

The theory about "the big crunch" (big bang, big crunch, big bang, and so on) would render the time needed for entropy, atrophy, or any other way in which all matter and atoms will disintegrate to take place, impossible. Also it would lead to nothing to crunch.
As I said it would take trillions of years, assuming time was flat and went on into such vastness.

As I also said, it is all conjecture, almost certainly wrong and much to much for our minds to begin to understand.

no one is saying that study, you misunderstand..again

anyone can look out their window and see a tree

what is known is that there is enough material in the universe, protons and neutrons to mean that the universe is flat or may be flat
given the time that we know the universe to be in existence.

No, it isn't 'known', at all.

As far as our understanding of physics allows, the mass of the universe will not disappear, or wear out, or disintegrate.
If anything it actually INCREASES as we see more distance and as Dark matter is discovered.

There is no reason why the universe should flatten further, even assuming the name of it's shape is 'flat'. You have your theories very mixed up, lfc.

look at this:
https://astronomy.stackexchange.com/questions/10374/does-the-mass-of-the-observable-universe-ever-change

Even if you're only referring the "ordinary" matter (such as stars, gas, and bicycles) and dark matter, the mass of the observable Universe does increase, not because mass is being created, but because the size of the observable Universe increases. In a billion years from now, we can see stuff that today is too far away for the light to have reached us, so its radius has increased.

Big mathematical equation and description.

However, another factor contributes to the mass increase, namely the so-called dark energy, which is a form of energy attributed to empty space. Since the Universe expands, dark energy is being created all the time.

it doesn't matter what the mass will be in the future, it is what it is now and the length of time the universe has been in existence until now
we are talking about the shape of the universe now

not at the time of the big bang, and not in the future

so again you are mixed up, in theory we don't know what is the future, but we can know what is in existence now

as yogi berra said, its amazing what you can observe just by looking

now you are going to have to think for yourself just a little bit study

When the big bang happened shrapnel only came out sideways.

yes, like your underpants mmh

I've tried, lfc.
I have obviously given this more thought and definitely more research than you have.

You are, basically, writing a load of confused nonsense.

lfc1971  • April 24, 2018 1:48 PM BST 

it doesn't matter what the mass will be in the future, it is what it is now and the length of time the universe has been in existence until now
we are talking about the shape of the universe now

not at the time of the big bang, and not in the future

Is in direct conflict with your assertion that the universe is flat because of the vastness of time.

no its not, we know the length of time the universe has been in existence (approx.)
we know the mass of the universe (approx.)

and we know that that mass and that length of time means that the universe is likely, with an error rate of 0.4% to be flat

it is time , it takes time to become flat, there has been more than enough time for the material in the universe to become flat given that time, that's all

at the time of the big bang was the universe flat? no
it takes time, how difficult is that to understand

study you can do all the reading up you wish, but there is a difference between knowledge and understanding, you have shown by almost all you statements here that you don't understand the simplest concepts

don't confuse one with the other

There hasn't been enough time, you need to read more than just Wikipedia and you need to understand the mathematical definition of "flat".

PLUS, as I keep saying, NO-ONE knows, especially you.

You are a very confused person, lfc.

ok

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/04/29/flat-earth-conspiracy-theorists-... (paywall)

The Ancient Greeks first argued the earth was round more than 2,000 years ago while Ferdinand Magellan proved it with the first successful circumnavigation in the 16th century.

Yet 500 years on, a growing number of conspiracy theorists are convinced that every single mainstream scientist since then has got it wrong. The planet, they insist, isn’t spherical at all. The earth, they maintain, is flat.

This weekend, more than 200 believers - among them an NHS manager and a special needs educational worker - attended Britain’s first ever Flat Earth Convention, held in a nondescript, three-star hotel in Birmingham.

anyone attend?

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/04/29/flat-earth-conspiracy-theorists-gather-discuss-proof-first-uk/

.

A few years ago, on a crystal clear beautiful summers day, I was being driven along the coast of west wales, between Barmouth and Tywyn.

We were on some high cliffs and I looked out west to the horizon. I couldn't believe my eyes as I could just make out the coast of Ireland!

Being as it's upwards of 90 miles away, it should easily be below the horizon. I think the earth must be flat or something for that to happen.

Drink

Could that observation be refraction?


If the Earth was flat we would all see sunrise/ sunset at the same time. Length of day would not vary based on North/South hemisphere.


A lunar eclipse shows light being "bent" by Earth's atmosphere.

It might have been the coast of somewhere further north round Wales's coast.
The bit of coast between Barmouth and Tywyn is north facing. The northern coast of Wales is a peninsula.

That's what you could see.

The world isn't flat. Really.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=erA3WQE9Zes

Flat Earthers on ITV yesterday

If the earth is a ball, why haven't I fallen off it yet?

I rest my case.

I enjoyed this.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JgY8zNZ35uw

There's surely only 1 question that needs to be addressed here.................what be the point in concealing the 'fact' that the earth is flat if it were true?

May 3, 2018 -- 11:56PM, wisewords wrote:

If the earth is a ball, why haven't I fallen off it yet?I rest my case.

gravity sucks u down wise!

May 4, 2018 -- 6:03PM, scandanavian_haven wrote:

There's surely only 1 question that needs to be addressed here.................what be the point in concealing the 'fact' that the earth is flat if it were true?

Read back and you'll see we've all been asking that. Strange how it hasn't been answered though

A flat earth makes no sense at all if you understand physics as the further you got away from the centre if there were an edge, gravity would be pulling peeling and collapsing the edges back towards it, trying to create a sphere. So like the natural order of massive things it to collapse to a sphere, where it's stable.

Unless you of course don't believe Gravity exists.

Also what would be on the other side? And why isn't there a property show about devloping there?

I trust property shows more than I trust conspiracy nuts. They'd find a way.

Everybody knows that "on the other side" are four elephants standing on the back of a turtle.

Has anyone asked why all the other planets are round?

lol Study; I read online that it was explained because the lenses of telescopes are curved to make them look round

So the telescopes are in out it too

*ON it

If a telescope on the moon was powerful enough to see aircraft flying around the earth, would those planes flying over Australia appear to be flying upside down

https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Flat_Earth

Rationalwiki is a very sensible site.

May 5, 2018 -- 12:19AM, crystalhunt wrote:

If a telescope on the moon was powerful enough to see aircraft flying around the earth, would those planes flying over Australia appear to be flying upside down

The guy in the youtube video shared earlier asked the same question.

What's the answer to that?

It really depends on what way you're facing the Earth from the moon, doesn't it?
Australia might be on the top unless you turn the telescope round.
Planes would be going in all directions. If you COULD see them from the moon, you'd just see the top of them and not the bottom as we do.

It'd have to be a bloody powerful telescope though.